DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border • Hacker News Board

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#101

Post by ataggart » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 9:57 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #76

ataggart wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The word "reasonable" is not in the 4th Amendment, nor does it contain text granting the power to search without a warrant. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and…

You're right. I should have said "the concept of reasonableness" instead of "the word reasonable". Either way: unless you think James Madison was incompetent, the subjective word "unreasonable" appears in the amendment alongside the objective word "warrant" entirely in order to give the courts leeway to make case-by-case decisions about authorizing searches. The word "unreasonable" was no clearer in the 1780s than it…

the subjective word "unreasonable" appears in the amendment alongside the objective word "warrant" entirely in order to give the courts leeway to make case-by-case decisions about authorizing searches.

This looks like it agrees with my point: the warrant process is the objective mechanism by which the subjective reasonable/unreasonable decision is carried out. This says nothing about the permissibility of searches where the warrant process is skipped.

Of course, one can choose to assume there exists some unwritten permission for searches other than via the warrant process, but then we're no longer discussing the rule of law.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#102

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 9:57 PM UTC

lhnn wrote: post #45

>“We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits,” Well frankly, in that case, I don't give a shit what you conclude, because you're mentally incompetent. "We also conclude that following the Constitution for Americans reentering the…

Look, when you're at the border you're not technically in the country, you're at the frontier. You don't get constitutional protections when you're not within the borders of the US. Obviously this border is a legal fiction, insofar as you take a step of only 2 feet and suddely you're subject a wholly different legal regime, but that's how things are and that's how every nation on earth handles it, to my knowledge.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#103

Post by rdouble » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 9:57 PM UTC

martinced wrote: post #100

tptacek wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My most vivid experience of traveling in Europe in 2000 was of having my bags searched on a train midway between Zurich to Prague. Not as a condition of getting on the train, but 30 minutes out from the last station we'd stopped at. Not on any individualized suspicion, but as one of several passengers to receive the same treatment. Not in order to protect the safety of passengers, but (evidently) as part of a drug in…

"You can certainly be searched without a warrant all throughout Europe." Never happened to me but I do believe you. However what did happen though is that a vehicle of mine equipped with a GPS got stolen in Europe and despite me telling the cops exactly behind which garage door the vehicle was located, they refused to open the garage without a warrant. Now so many days have passed by that it's likely that the thieves…

I'm not sure where you got that second quote. It's nowhere else in the thread, the article, or any of tptacek's comments on any other recent threads.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#104

Post by ahallock » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 10:00 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #69

betterunix wrote: post #4

So, remember a few months ago, when people like me were saying that the third parties are the only hope in America's democracy? Then a bunch of people said that Obama was worlds different from Romney, and that comparing Obama to Bush was lunacy. I have to wonder what happens when those Obama supporters with left-wing sentiments read an article like this.

An article like what? I voted or and contibuted to Obama because I felt he would fight for public schools and against nationwide voucher programs, and because he supported meaningful health care reform. I had absolutely zero expectation that Obama would waste political capital revamping CBP. The TSA is a far bigger problem for ordinary Americans than CBP is, and a more constitutionally offensive one. I think we can a…

Fight for public schools? Public schools are indoctrination centers where you graduate without any meaningful job skills. Why? So young people can't compete with adults in the job market, and are then forced to go into massive debt for college. You aren't taught logic or philosophy, which would lead people to invalidate the State and public school system.

Education needs major disruption, which we're beginning to see from some startups, but why would anyone fight for the embarrassment called public education?

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#105

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 10:00 PM UTC

steveklabnik wrote: post #58

betterunix wrote: post #4

So, remember a few months ago, when people like me were saying that the third parties are the only hope in America's democracy? Then a bunch of people said that Obama was worlds different from Romney, and that comparing Obama to Bush was lunacy. I have to wonder what happens when those Obama supporters with left-wing sentiments read an article like this.

> I have to wonder what happens when those Obama supporters with left-wing sentiments read an article like this. Most liberals I know just shrug. It's why the far left has so much contempt for liberals in general. Every time I criticize Obama, I have to go out of my way to qualify that I'm _not_ a Republican, either.

Strangely, I feel the same way about the far left. Just because they hold an extreme position doesn't make their opinions any more valid; frankly I find far-left and far-right thinkers to be alarmingly similar, and am appalled by by their inflexible and unreasoning ideological approaches.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#106

Post by rdouble » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 10:03 PM UTC

ahallock wrote: post #104

tptacek wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An article like what? I voted or and contibuted to Obama because I felt he would fight for public schools and against nationwide voucher programs, and because he supported meaningful health care reform. I had absolutely zero expectation that Obama would waste political capital revamping CBP. The TSA is a far bigger problem for ordinary Americans than CBP is, and a more constitutionally offensive one. I think we can a…

Fight for public schools? Public schools are indoctrination centers where you graduate without any meaningful job skills. Why? So young people can't compete with adults in the job market, and are then forced to go into massive debt for college. You aren't taught logic or philosophy, which would lead people to invalidate the State and public school system. Education needs major disruption, which we're beginning to see…

Public schools are indoctrination centers where you graduate without any meaningful job skills.

At my public high school you could take classes in small engines, CAD, graphic design, business bookkeeping and general accounting, computer programming, welding and so forth. There was even a class where students would build an entire house and then auction it off. As far as I remember, nearly every other high school in the area had similar programs.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#107

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 10:07 PM UTC

ataggart wrote: post #101

tptacek wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. I should have said "the concept of reasonableness" instead of "the word reasonable". Either way: unless you think James Madison was incompetent, the subjective word "unreasonable" appears in the amendment alongside the objective word "warrant" entirely in order to give the courts leeway to make case-by-case decisions about authorizing searches. The word "unreasonable" was no clearer in the 1780s than it…

the subjective word "unreasonable" appears in the amendment alongside the objective word "warrant" entirely in order to give the courts leeway to make case-by-case decisions about authorizing searches. This looks like it agrees with my point: the warrant process is the objective mechanism by which the subjective reasonable/unreasonable decision is carried out. This says nothing about the permissibility of searches wh…

This looks like it agrees with my point: the warrant process is the objective mechanism by which the subjective reasonable/unreasonable decision is carried out.

No, the warrant process is an objective mechanism by which the subjective decision is carried out. You have no textual grounds for saying it's the exclusive method, and there's no precedential support for it either. If we were to posit it as the only reasonable mechanism, then a police officer who observed you stuffing a dead body into the trunk of your car would be powerless to delay you absent a warrant, which is clearly a ridiculous position.

The role of the warrant is to allow the police to barge/kick in your door on the basis of available information rather than having to stake you out in hopes that you'll expose your criminal activity to them, which would allow them to conduct a regular search. It's not a prerequisite to a search and never has been AFAIK.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#108

Post by AJ007 » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 10:13 PM UTC

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #15

betterunix wrote: post #4

So, remember a few months ago, when people like me were saying that the third parties are the only hope in America's democracy? Then a bunch of people said that Obama was worlds different from Romney, and that comparing Obama to Bush was lunacy. I have to wonder what happens when those Obama supporters with left-wing sentiments read an article like this.

>Obama was worlds different from Romney, and that comparing Obama to Bush was lunacy Amazingly there is a middle ground. Yes, Obama is taking after Bush in scary ways. It makes me sick and it's why I voted third party in the re-election. That having been said, it's terribly reductionist to say that "Romney and Obama are the same" and anyone who is a woman or gay will almost surely agree with me. >I have to wonder wha…

We are all victims of Bernaysian manipulation of public opinion.

Fortunately for us, there are real journalists who see through the thin veil of Republican & Democrat propaganda. Like the specific and unnamed NYTimes columnist who regurgitates lobbyist talking points almost line for line, many "journalists" and political commentators simply regurgitate the bullshit that is being feed to them. What is embarrassing is that the segment of the population that counts as educated are the ones gobbling it up.

Change will happen through radical transparency. Imagine watching a debate interrupted any time a candidates says something false. Or perhaps a Presidential address rebuffed on demand with clips of things that individual said while campaigning that directly opposed what they are saying now. Accountability does not have to be an option or a convenience.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#109

Post by betterunix » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 10:14 PM UTC

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #90

pmorici wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you perhaps overestimate the setback that might have occurred. For example, things like repealing DADT would have happened regardless because a lawsuit had already been won ruling DADT unconstitutional a year prior to Obama doing away with the policy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log_Cabin_Republicans#Log_Cabin... The Wikipedia article on Mitt Romney http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governorship_of_Mitt_Romney#Sa…

I can't believe you're chastising me or trying to correct me, or whatever, for judging Romney based on the actions that he PLEDGED to carry out during his term if he were elected.

To be honest, I judged Romney by what he actually did when he was governor. Which was basically, "Whatever might get him votes next time."

On the other hand, when I looked at Obama's actions as president...well, I just could not bring myself to vote for him. To push the beloved healthcare bill through (remember, the bill that failed the deliver the one thing everyone really wanted, the public option?), he promised the pharmaceutical industry a stronger crackdown on illegal drugs, and he absolutely followed through on that promises: more paramilitary raids on medical marijuana facilities during just his first two years in office than in all eight Bush years combined. The administration's push for strong copyright, trademark, patent, and trade secret laws and trade agreements seem to have been equally motivated by ties to industry. His approach to reforming the student loan system was to focus on interest rates and offer indentured servitude for people who cannot repay their loans.

What candidates say during an election is worthless, even when they pledge to do something. Politicians lie to get votes. Look to their actions, not their words, and look to their ties to industry (at least if you are voting for a major party, which amounts to choosing which set of businesses will get special treatment by the government).

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#110

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Feb 09, 2013, 10:15 PM UTC

lhnn wrote: post #59

tptacek wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Constitution does not forbid the government from conducting searches without warrants at the border. The word "reasonable" is in the 4th Amendment in order to defer judgement about what searches are and aren't constitutional to the the courts. Unfortunately for your argument, SCOTUS has for many many decades held that border searches are, subject to some limitations, reasonable.

I think that, aside from disagreeing with most of that principle, it is futile to search the contents of electronic devices at the border. I could ship an encrypted device through mail, I could use steganography and encryption to upload a file to a personal server and have someone immediately unplug said server... there are lots of ways to transport digital files that don't involve the physical device at the border.

it is futile to search the contents of electronic devices at the border.

Just because you wouldn't store anything incriminating/contraband doesn't mean that nobody else will. Quite a few searches of laptops and digital cameras have led to discovery of child pron, sob obviously not everyone shares your understanding of data security.